West Ham debate: Should Diafra Sakho be allowed near the first team?

LONDON, ENGLAND - SEPTEMBER 30: Diafra Sakho (2nd R) of West Ham United celebrates scoring the opening goal with his team mates during the Premier League match between West Ham United and Swansea City at London Stadium on September 30, 2017 in London, England. (Photo by Dan Mullan/Getty Images)
LONDON, ENGLAND - SEPTEMBER 30: Diafra Sakho (2nd R) of West Ham United celebrates scoring the opening goal with his team mates during the Premier League match between West Ham United and Swansea City at London Stadium on September 30, 2017 in London, England. (Photo by Dan Mullan/Getty Images)

Diafra Sakho is a player who divides fan opinion. Since joining West Ham he has been among the goals, but his attitude is a real issue.

In a recent episode, the men of The West Ham Way podcast debated whether Sakho should be at the club. Bringing up a number of factors, it became clear this wasn’t about his ability as a player. It was about whether the man himself should be wearing the club colors at all.

Where should the club be drawing the line when it comes to player behavior? Should it be about whether the squad get on with the player, or whether the player shows the club disrespect? Or another line altogether?

The Case For Keeping Sakho

Point number one for keeping Sakho in East London is simple, he scores goals. The Hammers have lacked goal scorers in recent years and Sakho is as good as we’ve had in the last 6-7 seasons. So why would you want to get rid of a player like that?

It’s true that if we sell the Senegalese striker in the new year he will need replacing, and who do we replace him with? There aren’t too many reliable goalscorers available for the kind of money we’d want to part with. And there are even fewer that will be allowed to move in the January transfer window.

More from Green Street Hammers - West Ham

He is also, according to ExWhuEmployee, popular with the squad. It may sound silly to those who know all the issues he has with the club, but there is evidence. He does get the entire team celebrating with him when he scores, and they do always seem genuinely happy for him. Noble even said so in his interview after the Stoke game.

So if he’s popular and scoring, why get rid of him? Why is there an article like this at all? Should we not be just giving him a contract and going from there?

The Case for Getting Rid

Quite simply, his attitude and behavior in respect to this club stinks. When I think of the type of behavior that would get me fired, it amazes me that the club is still paying his wage. He is a serial offender in this area, and I would be happy to see him leave.

If you track his story through his time here, his first season was great. But when he lost his place he apparently sulked and at times refused to travel to away games if he wasn’t starting. There are players who get kicked out the academy who would kill for a spot on the bench. An attitude like that is not on in any way.

But the smoking gun for me is this summer’s fiasco. Not only did he ask to leave the club, which is something I’m never happy about anyway, but he actually organized his own medical at another club. How much do you have to want to leave to do that. Even Peter Odemwengie had the sense to at least just sit in the car park.

Next: Lack of ambition against Arsenal a worry

I know he scores, but I would genuinely just be happy with him out of the club. I want a club I can be proud of, and I can’t get behind someone with that behavior. He took the name of West Ham and disrespected it, and as a fan how can you condone that.